News: Another thing about "The Master"

I am thinking about trimming the focus of the blog to only being about Paul Thomas Anderson's upcoming film "The Master."

Anyway, I guess some lucky audiences were treated to a surprise early screening of the film, and everyone says it's great.  The film will come out in September, and we should all go see it.

Here's an article about it.

Heads Up: The American (2010)

            

            George Clooney is one of the biggest names in Hollywood and his films always draw buzz.  Still for being such a huge super star he tends to be in quality films for the most part, which I think deserves credit.  I recently watched “The American” which for whatever reason didn’t seem to get all that much talk (maybe I just missed it).  It deserves talk though.  I think that “The American” is in many ways a modern classic, and I hope it endures to be regarded as such as time goes on.

            The plot follows a paranoid American named either Jack, Edward or “Mr. Butterfly,” played by Mr. Clooney, who builds and sells guns on the black market, but is trying to get away from his violent past.  The film kicks off with an incredible opening scene and as the movie progresses with its little dialogue and minimalistic story telling the tension rarely lets up.  The film is really modern noir masterpiece.  It is a story of mixed morality, questionable loyalty, and sparsely scattered but intense shoot outs.  The entire film is beautifully shot, with each composition and camera move being carefully selected and set up.  The locations, too, are wonderfully chosen.  The film opens in Sweden with crisp black trees against the stark white snow, and the rest of the film takes place in small towns in the mountains of Italy.  The town’s labyrinthine alleys and stairs and doors create a fascinating environment for a twisted tale to unfold.  This is the time I feel to mention that if you have the option of watching the movie in high definition, take it.  The beautiful compositions and locations are full of rich texture and the crisp resolution of a blu-ray really brings these out.  It is a movie that reminds me the difference high definition makes.

            In this movie we really get inside the head of Clooney’s character, both through his performance and through the cinematography.  There are very few characters, and aside from them there are also very few extra’s in most of the scenes.  It is filmed in a way that makes the audience suspicious of every other person on screen, each passerby being a potential threat.  Scenes take their time and linger on open spaces, making every second tense, making us worry about what is out there, or who that person in the café is working for.  It’s really great the way camera work and staging are used to really force the audience to see the world through “Jack’s” paranoid eyes.  Music was done by Herbert Grönemeyer, which is weird.  Grönemeyer is sort of like the German version of Phil Colins, but even lamer.  Somehow, though, he turns in a terrific score that is very under spoken but beautiful.

            I do think a couple weak points keep the movie from really soaring.  With so few characters, every relationship is very important, and I think Jack’s relationship with the local priest is both a little hackneyed and stereotypical, and also not particularly well written.  The relationship holds a key spot in the narrative, but most of the scenes between the two characters tend to drag, and throw off the rhythm of the rest of the film.  There is also a symbolic butterfly motif surrounding Jack (or Mr. Butterfly) that I really like.  I like all of the references to the motif, except for the butterfly tattoo that he has, which I find a bit silly.

            The main featurette that came on the blu-ray I watched discussed at some length how the film was made partially as an homage to Sergio Leone and the spaghetti western mode.  Aspects of this are clear, but I see it as much more of a noir than a western.  Part of me tends to count that against the film in a way, because I don’t feel the film makers succeeded in doing what they set out to do.  Still when I just watch the film on its own terms, rather than through the lens of film maker intention, it is an impeccably crafted piece of story telling. 

            I really do think this film is in a lot of ways a triumph.  It tells the story of a man fruitlessly seeking redemption from his sordid criminal past.  It is a well paced and exciting story.  Cinematography is consistently breathtakingly beautiful.  Acting is generally quite good, with Clooney in top form turning in a very dark and brooding performance as the title character.  The film evokes a lot of the best aspects of classic noir films that have come to be regarded as among the best films ever made, and I think that with time this film, too, deserves to be studied and regarded as a classic.

Review: The Dark Knight Rises

I haven’t really done much in terms of reviews for new films on this blog, and especially such a large mainstream film.  But Chris Nolan makes quite a splash and is in general worthy of discussion, though probably not as much as he already gets.  He has been noted as a film maker who makes solid artistic films that are also flashy, appealing, accessible movies, with varying balances of the two modes.  His latest, The Dark Knight Rises is obviously one of the biggest hype machines this year (which is saying something).  I had the recent pleasure of seeing it in imax and thought I’d throw my thoughts into the mix.  I am sick and tired of hearing about Chris Nolan, and have heard more than enough about his virtues as a director.  I’m not a fan of Christian Bale, and although I like Tom Hardy, I’ve never been all that interested in Bane as a character, and was doubtful Tom Hardy could pull anything out of the character behind the mask.  I entered the film very skeptical, and expecting it to be mediocre at best.  I ended up, though, feeling pleasantly surprised.

            To begin, I’ll just say that the film is very, very good.  I have a lot of thoughts about the film, but I will try, and likely fail, to be concise.  Since seeing the film I have thought about it quite a bit, and can’t think about anything else but seeing it again, which is a sign of how compelling it is.  In fact if the film is nothing it is incredibly compelling.  Basically from start to finish it is a pulse inducing thrill ride.  Chris Nolan has clearly honed his talents as a director of action films and this movie benefits from it.  It truly is an intense journey.  However it is often those moments that seem to be thrown in just to appease the films lust to be a Hollywood actioneer that it loses integrity as a good film.  Silly formulaic one-liners, a police officers hat blowing off, Jim Gordon dramatically putting his glasses on etc.

            One of the films biggest struggles was obviously following up Heath Ledgers Joker of the previous film.  While from a literary or symbolic stand point The Joker is a much more substantial character than the likes of Bane, Joker has no humanity.  Bane is presented with an interesting amount of moral ambiguity that for me make him a much more interesting person to have as a villain.  His dialogue is consistently the strongest in the film (the only good dialogue in the film in my opinion, more on that later).  Bane’s wardrobe was great.  And I was not prepared for how fantastic Tom Hardy’s portrayal of the character would be.  He absolutely blew me away.  The voice was great and the physical presence was unbeatable.  I count Bane as being among the strongest elements of the film.  However Chris Nolan continues his trend of not being able to finish characters.  There is a turn at the end that rather sully’s Bane as a character and a villain.  Still I think that Bane is all in all a more compelling character than Joker was, and I think production designers, screenwriters and Tom Hardy should all be lauded for the terrific presentation of the character.

            The turn I mentioned is a twist that shows up in act 3, and I won’t say anymore other than that it is an interesting and well crafted twist, that I didn’t see coming.  I just wish it hadn’t lessened Bane in a way that it didn’t need to.  The story is a compelling one, and is well timed.  Some elements are a bit confusing and forced, and I’m disappointed that its motivations are so similar (ie identical) to “Batman Begins.”  Still it works well.  Batman is presented as an aging and somewhat pathetic character unable to move on, and this is done well.  Christian Bale’s Batman voice is as silly as ever, and will continue to be joked about on the internet, but his turn as Bruce Wayne is as interesting as it has been since the first film.  I feel this is the pargraph to mention Catwoman, but I have little to say.  Anne Hathaway does a good enough job with her.  I’ve heard opinions running the spectrum, and I seem to land in the middle.

            As much fun as I had with the film, and as good as I thought it was, I’m certainly not without complaints, a few having already been mentioned.  The dialogue in general is pretty weak.  It’s full of formulaic clichés, clunky exposition and overly manipulative emotion.  The music is hackneyed and overly present, as is Hans Zimmer’s modus operandi (again with Bane being the strongest point, as his theme is great).  The plot, while generally well crafted, does make a few serious missteps, and the ending (while satisfying) had elements that were not very well executed.  I think, as with Nolan’s other Batman films, this film is very good but makes enough substantial mistakes to hold it back from being something much better than it is, even though it comes so close.

            Thematically “Rises” takes on a lot of current themes with a bit more grace than “Dark Knight’s” misplaced statement about the patriot act, though not much.  There are irrelevant references to current occupy rhetoric from Catwoman and Bane seems to represent utopian anarchist views, as he reclaims power and places it in the hands of the people, views that in the end are represented as violent and chaotic.  In a final symbolic war our heroes are a fascist police force exhibiting some police brutality on the “terrorists” who may or may not just represent those repressed by an over reaching legal structure.  The fact that the film raises questions about political structures speaks to its credit, but I find it odd that a story about a vigilante hero would turn into a seemingly pro-fascist political statement.  It’s not as simple as that, and I’ve got more thinking to do, but that was my initial take on things.

            So let’s wrap up before things get out of hand.  This is a film of such clout that you’ve probably already seen it.  For those of you who may still be on the fence about it I can report, as someone who was also very skeptical, that it is in fact a very good movie and it is very much worth watching (especially in imax if possible).  It is full of mistakes, but not enough to keep it from being very good.  It may well be my favorite of the Nolan Batman franchise.  Those are my thoughts.  I’m interested in yours, please feel free to comment.

Album of the Month (?): The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady (1963)

I know the internet doesn't care much for excuses, so instead of rambling about why it's been a month or two since my last post, I'll give a quick double post.

Rochester's Jazz Festival recently came and went, bringing people to the streets, and cars to the 20 dollar parking.  Most of the acts were really bad, and could hardly be called jazz (here's looking at you Dweezil Zappa), but the atmosphere was exciting and fresh.  There was a jazz trio playing in Java's downtown that had the subversive fire that makes Jazz great.  As I always say: Jazz is the Rock and Roll of the music world.  In the '40s, '50s and '60s jazz was dangerous and scary to the safe white mainstream.  It was music that broke the rules.  It was wild, it was drug fueled, and it was a lively, rebellious counter culture.  The beat writers weren't trying to sound like Buddy Holly after all (not that I don't love Buddy Holly), they were listening to Miles Davis.  Sitting in there and listening to the jazz music in the dank, humid coffee shop made me want to write subversive literature.  It ignited a passion for Jazz that has been burning wildly since.

So I've spent the last several weeks listening to hardly anything but jazz.  Two clear favorites emerged for me: the wild free Jazz of Ornette Coleman that exploded onto the scene in the late 50's and music of Charles Mingus.

"Ah Um" has always been one of my favorite records, but I decided to start digging into Mingus' library a bit more.  I came upon the 1963 album "The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady" and it instantly blew my mind.  This is a land mark of jazz, and of music in general.  It is a bold record that shows Mingus' chops as a composer and band leader.  The album runs just under 40 minutes and is essentially one long piece divided into 4 tracks.  Mingus leads an 11 piece band through his composition and himself plays double bass and at times piano.  His tendency as a perfectionist evidently led to heavy use of over dubbing to get everything just right.  This obviously sets itself from a lot of other jazz, which often relies on the raw energy of improvisation and live performance.  That energy of performance isn't lost in the theater though, thanks to the sharp production but especially to the passion felt in the musicians through their instruments, and of course the brilliance of the piece and Mingus' devotion to it.

The album ebbs and flows through idea's and moods, progressing the way a symphony or a piece of theater would.  No wonder that it was partially written as a ballet.  The music needs nothing else though.  It feels like more than an album.  It feels like you are being taken on a journey.  It feels like theater, entering through your ears and resonating in every bone.  The music is pure life.

It is one of the best albums I have ever heard, and I have nothing else to say about it.  When I listened to it, it was combined with "Mingus, Mingus, Mingus, Mingus, Mingus" another great album from later that year.  This is a reminder of the fire of rebellion that burns in great jazz music.  I think that jazz at its best is the peak of music and even art.  It requires technical mastery, and mastery of craft, but also it eschews rules and structure, constantly forging new idea's and paths, and constantly challenging accepted norms and standards.  Jazz has become a heady, studied game for white people, and has lost most of its rebellious spirit.  Albums like this remind me what Jazz once was, and what it still can mean.  This music comes straight out of the cosmos, enters my body and resides in my brain.  This album is a master work.

Trailer: The Master

It has been an eternity since I've posted, and I feel bad about that.  I've been moving, and now I have no internet.  I'm sitting in the local Coffee Shop taking care of some business, and I figured it would be best if I posted to let you know I'm still alive and I still think about movies and music.

So I'll repost this trailer for PTA's upcoming film "The Master" that was released a few weeks ago.  If you only see one film this year, make it this one.

Heads Up: Ran (1985)

It's been far too long since I've written a Heads Up for you.  So here goes.  Akira Kurosawa's 1985 film "Ran."
If you think you ought to see "Ran," you probably already know you want to see it.  I'll just confirm: yes, you should see it.  Like most of Kurosawa's films this is an epic, and truly an epic, and an artistic masterpiece.  It was the biggest budget Japanese film ever to have been released when it came out.  It isn't hard to see why.  The film boasts incredible production design, thousands of extras, huge sweeping shots of grand locations and enormous armies.  There is a ton going on here.  It truly is a spectacle to behold.
The story is based on Shakespeare's "King Lear."  I had heard that before seeing the movie, but expected it to be based on Shakespeare the way "Forbidden Planet" is based on Shakespeare (that is to say, hardly at all).  This really is just the story of "King Lear" though, with a few minor adaptations made in order to make it fit in Feudal age Japan.  I love "King Lear," and I find Feudal age Japan terribly interesting, so this film is really a recipe for greatness, especially with the genius of Kurosawa behind the wheel.
Still I didn't find the film as engaging as other Kurosawa classics such as "Rashoman" and "Seven Samurai."  This was the first color film I've seen of his, and Kurosawa uses color to the fullest advantage in creating a vibrant, distinct and vast atmosphere for the story to reside in.  Visually the film is absolutely arresting.  It is full of beautifully composed shots, staged with stunning accuracy.  I remember in particular a shot of several mounted warriors standing in the foreground watching a mountain ridge miles away as two armies move into place on the horizon.  It's a stunningly framed shot, and I can't imagine what planning it took to time and frame up subjects who were many miles away from each other.  As a quick scan of the wikipedia article about the film will tell you, Kurosawa spent 10 years prior to filming painting every shot of the film for story boarding.  What an eccentric artistic genius thing to do, right?  Out of control.
This is truly an artistic achievement, and certainly a masterpiece.  I felt it suffered from some pacing issues that caused the story to drag at points when it did not need to.  This does keep it from being as great a film as it could have been.
In the end though we still have one of the grandest and most impressive films ever made.  It has great sets and locations, huge battle scenes, terrifying stunts (I'm thinking specifically of the numerous shots showing soldiers being shot off their horses while at full gallop with an army of other horses riding past them, someone had to have gotten hurt) and stunning production value.  Everything facet of the film is executed deliberately with artistic consideration; every costume, every frame, every actors blocking.  This is a calculated and beautiful piece of classic world cinema.  If that's what you dig, next time you have about 3 hours, this film is worthy of your time.  In fact a more valid question to ask yourself isn't if the film is worth your time, but if you are worth its....

In that case.  Excelsior.

From the Feed: Movie Miniatures.

I found this cool blog about movie miniatures.  I love miniatures.  I think they're super cool, I think they're a very cool convention of film making, especially now, when they are so underutilized.  Movies with good practical effects and miniatures always catch my eye.

This blog just has lots of cool pictures.  I liked it, thought I'd pass it on.

http://movieminiatures.blogspot.com/